In the Preamble to the United Convention on the Law of the
Sea, signed at Montego Bay in December 1982, recognition is made
that "the problems of ocean space are closely interrelated
and need to be considered as a whole." The acknowledgement
of this fundamental unity of concerns within the marine sphere
has been a first significant step that necessarily leads to
further recognition that ocean space problems are inseparable
from the problems associated with land and with the air. The
fact, for instance, that 90 per cent of ocean pollution results,
through river run-offs and via the atmosphere, from land-based
human activities encourages a rethinking of the meaning of ocean
problems. Ocean problems can no longer be viewed in isolation
from those on land and in the atmosphere. There are two main
reasons for this: one is economic and the other, environmental.

As a result of technological as well as world population
growth, the variety and intensity of uses of the oceans have been
rapidly increasing. A meaningful view of the totality of these
uses, and the problems of the oceans that they imply, is given in
the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea. Activities on land and
in air (and outer) space have, likewise, become inextricably
related to human activities in the oceans. Consequently the
environmental and economic impact of these activities are part of
the ocean problems that have, therefore, become global in
magnitude. Some examples of the vital economic relationship
between human activities in the oceans and on land or in air (and
outer) space are following:

- harvesting living resources, fisheries and aquaculture,
is part of the global food supply;

- shipping and navigation form a vital part of the world
trade and communication network;

- exploiting submarine oil and gas deposits are an
increasingly important element of the world's energy sources,
making up more than 20 per cent of world supplies;

- tapping the endless movement of tides and waves and the
ocean's thermal gradient have a large potential for future
energy supply;

- developing marine technologies is increasingly carried
out in symbiosis with other advanced technologies; and

- the global armaments race already embraces lands and
oceans, as well as (outer) space.

These human activities generate waste, which increases in
quantity, variety, and perniciousness. The resulting ocean-based
pollution, interacting with the much more considerable
land-sourced pollution of the oceans, conveyed through the
atmosphere and river run-offs, exacerbates the already critical
pollution of the entire planet. Thus, most of today's technology
spews out effluents of radioactive materials and
non-biodegradable toxic chemicals which persist and diffuse
throughout the ecosystem. This bring us to a second,
environmental, reason why the marine sphere cannot be seen in
isolation from the land and air spheres: pollution consolidates
land, air, and oceans into a truly single physical space.

Inasmuch as the activities in the oceans cannot, therefore, be
viewed in isolation from those on land or in air (and outer)
space these activities being qualitatively the same with respect
to both economic aims and environmental consequence - the
problems of the oceans must not be seen in isolation from the
problems of land and air (and outer) space. Ocean problems are
part and parcel of the totality of global problems.

Economic and environmental considerations in the appreciation
of ocean problems cast a notion of ocean management which relies
on the key importance of the biosphere - the ecological whole
consisting of the oceans, land, and air. It is amazing to realize
that a basic scientific truism which states the fundamental
ecological unity of oceans, land, and air has only been
established recently as a politically significant premise in
understanding worldwide problems and in formulating approaches to
their management and resolution.

The marine sphere forms not only an inseparable element of the
biosphere. The oceans also play a central role in the regulation
of the climate of the planet. Global climate change in the
direction of warming has become a concern inevitably connected
with the processes and changes taking place in the oceans. Should
global warming materialize, sealevel rise will change the face of
the planet. Climate change boosts a perspective on the oceans
that unifies its peculiar problems with universal problems.

Ocean governance in the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea
is viewed as a balanced matrix of ocean activities or uses, on
the one hand, and protection and preservation of the marine
environment, on the other hand. The guiding inspiration in
evolving a comprehensive regime for this purpose was the concept
of the Common Heritage of Mankind. This concept forms the
core precept, the heart, of ocean governance in the new law of
the sea. However, though its application is limited to the
international seabed, its significance as a foundational concept
in the tackling of ocean problems is not precluded.

Keeping in mind the relationships between ocean and global
problems, the following questions can be raised: How far should
the concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind and its
institutional implications be extended to the management of other
areas of global concern? How far can ocean governance in the 1982
Convention on the Law of the Sea - with its guiding concept of
the Common Heritage of Mankind - stand as a model for the
management of other areas of global concern?

It was Ambassador Arvid Pardo of Malta who on 1 November 1967
first proposed that the new law of the sea must be based no
longer on the notion of "freedom of the seas" but on a
new concept, the Common Heritage of Mankind (CHM). He presented
this concept as a novel legal principle worthy to be introduced
in international law. With this concept began the "marine
revolution." Professor Elisabeth Mann Borgese (1980)
commented:

The basic principle, the motor force of the 'marine
revolution,' is the concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind. It
cannot be stressed enough that the adoption of this principle by
the XXV General Assembly as a norm of international law marked
the beginning of a revolution in international relations....

It is surprising, therefore, that the Law of the Sea
Conference itself has done so little about elaborating the
concept of the Common Heritage and giving it a clear definition
in legal and economic terms. For the outsider or newcomer to the
law of the sea, it is difficult to conceptualize the precise
meaning of this concept which remains somewhat rhetorical and
etherial. Yet the components of a definition are all in the
present version of the Draft Convention, that is the Informal
Composite Negotiating Text, and one might use the components
drawn from four different Articles (136,137,140, and 145) to
formulate a definition in two basic articles:

First Article

The Area and its resources are the Common Heritage of
Mankind.

Second Article

For the purpose of this Convention 'Common Heritage of
Mankind' means that:

1. No State shall claim or exercise sovereignty or
sovereign rights over any part of the Area or its resources,
nor shall any State or person, natural or judicial,
appropriate any part thereof. No such claim or exercise of
sovereignty of sovereign rights, nor such appropriation shall
be recognized.

2. The Area and its resources shall be managed for the
benefit of mankind as a whole, irrespective of the
geographical location of the States, whether coastal or
land-locked, and taking into particular consideration the
interest and needs of the developing countries as
specifically provided for in this Part of the Convention.

3. The Area shall be open to use exclusively for
peaceful purposes by all States, whether coastal or
land-locked without discrimination and without prejudice to
the other provisions of this Part of the present Convention.

4. Necessary measures shall be taken in order to ensure
effective protection of the marine environment from harmful
effects which may arise from activities in the Area, in
accordance with Part XII of the present Convention."

In 1970, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 2749
declaring the CHM as the primal principle governing the
exploitation of the international seabed. The CHM concept was
thereafter given legal status in the 1982 Law of the Sea
Convention (entered into force November 1994) as well as in the
earlier 1972 UNESCO Convention for the Protection of the World
Cultural and Natural Heritage and in the 1979 Moon Treaty (both
already in force).

The CHM concept underpins the whole process of sustainable
development in the marine sphere and constitutes the basis for
ocean governance in the new law of the sea. What cannot be
overemphasized is that the CHM concept - with its developmental,
environmental, and peace-enhancing approaches to the resolution
of ocean problems - embodies the most comprehensive formula and
rationale for the management of marine resources or the ocean
environment. Thus, the concept has significant implications for
the governance of world resources, in general, and of the
biosphere as a whole.

It is said that in searching for a regime to govern the
exploration and exploitation of nodules in the deep seabed, the
international community found instead, through the CHM concept,
the most advanced system for international cooperation in
technology development and transfer, crucial in the bridging of
the development gap, creating in the process the beginning of a
new form of ocean governance, and world governance in the
twenty-first century. (Borgese 1990) The growing impact of the
concept, in the context of the process of its definition, is an
outstanding development in international relations. (Postyshev
1990)

Acceptance of the CHM concept, although at present limited to
areas like the international seabed area, could be an immensely
important innovation in geopolitical thinking, introducing new
ingredients of equity and social justice to political
decision-making. In addition, the CHM concept introduces a
totally new economic theory, transcending both the market theory
and the central planning theory. (Borgese 1991 ) An emerging
economics of the CHM, founded on a new economic philosophy, holds
a potential to transform our present world!

Certain guiding principles of the CHM concept lend themselves
for application to other areas of global concern. The five
principles may stated (see Borgese 1980): first, the principle of
non-appropriation which determines that no single State can claim
exclusive title to the CHM; second, the principle of shared
management which entails a new form of social relations based on
an international regime of cooperation; third, the principle of
"common benefit for mankind as a whole," implying an
equitable scheme of distribution and redistribution of wealth;
fourth, the principle of "use for exclusively peaceful
purposes," which injects the notion of disarmament in the
process of implementing the CHM concept; and fifth, the principle
of conservation for future generations which reiterates the
principle of sustainable development in the oceans.

Underlying these five principles is a system of peaceful
settlement of disputes without which the CHM philosophy cannot be
logically pursued. This makes the CHM a complete framework for
the comprehensive process of global governance. Moreover, from an
appreciation of the principles or attributes of the CHM, it
becomes apparent that the CHM concept is in agreement with the
fundamental principles and purposes of the United Nations.

From an institutional standpoint, the challenge posed by the
CHM concept may be conceived as a problem of integration. The
institutional mechanisms required to implement the CHM concept
need to be unified in a new system of global governance. The
model for this integration spans horizontal and vertical levels
of governance.

At the horizontal level, integration takes place in two ways:
first, among sectoral/disciplinary institutions (for example
environment, defence) which have hitherto been operating
independently from one another, and second, between the public
and private sectors whose interactions point to the direction of
more intense cooperation. At the vertical level, integration of
national, regional, and global institutions concerned with
similar issues is called for. Relevant to this is, for example,
the proposal to establish an Ocean Assembly in the United Nations
to fulfill the role of a global mechanism which addresses the
domain of ocean problems: from policy setting, to operational
activities, to dispute settlement. The institutional implications
of the CHM concept constitute its strategic value in shaping the
world of the twenty-first century.